 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
145.64.134.241
In Reply to: And there's the whole problem posted by Jon Risch on May 16, 2006 at 21:03:59:
"The very act of creating a true DBT situation automatically leads to extra difficulties for the listener, additional hurdles to overcome, and makes it harder to actually hear subtle things."So all those scientists and engineers who conduct DBT to evaluate the quality of new audio codecs are just a bunch of idealistic dumbnuts?
Klaus
Follow Ups:
Naw, I didn't say that, you did.In those instances, we have professionals, who, for the most part, know what they are doing, and take every step and precaution to MAXIMIZE the sensitivity of the listening test, doing their best to get as much useful data as they can. What would be the point of conducting a half-assed codec test, only to find out later on, the codec sounded like dreck to many poeple with discerning tastes? There is MONEY involved, and money spent on these efforts, they would not only be remiss to conduct a lousy test, they would probably be fired!
It would be interesting if we could get jj to tell us HOW MUCH a single well conducted DBT session costs (in round numbers), even though they had a dedicated set-up on call to do it. Once you factor in the cost of obtaining or renting the facilities, the sound playback equipment, the measurement gear, the acoustic treatments, etc., the cost of compensation for the listening subjects (who MUST be trained, or the whole thing is a sham)I think you would find that the cost is staggering on a per session basis for any one BUT a dedicated department of a major corporation to conduct professional and well executed DBT's on a regular basis using purpose built dedicated facilities.
Anyway, I don't preface or append every post that I make about DBT's to indicate that they are primarily concerning the amatuer ones, not the professional ones, like they do for codecs.
The ones that cause all the trouble are the ones that have been done haphazardly over many years, often with significant flaws or procedural errors (see: A discussion of selected ABX/DBT issues:
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/2190.html
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/2579.html
http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/prophead/messages/2580.html
Jon Risch
Jon says: It would be interesting if we could get jj to tell us HOW MUCH a single well conducted DBT session costs (in round numbers), even though they had a dedicated set-up on call to do it. Once you factor in the cost of obtaining or renting the facilities, the sound playback equipment, the measurement gear, the acoustic treatments, etc., the cost of compensation for the listening subjects (who MUST be trained, or the whole thing is a sham)I think you would find that the cost is staggering on a per session basis for any one BUT a dedicated department of a major corporation to conduct professional and well executed DBT's on a regular basis using purpose built dedicated facilities.---
If you want to know how it works in your living room, you do the test in your living room. Cancel all facility costs. If you're doing the listening yourself, cancel all the compensation issues. If you've got a boyfriend, girlfriend, or spouse, cancel the need for an independent test administrator. If you are willing to let level mismatches show up as audible results (which in some cases would be a valid outcome, in others not), you need no meters or measurement equipment.
So, what's the beef? If you're doing it for yourself, you use yourself, your own equipment, etc, and just vary the requisite things in the requisite way having your spouse/whatever change the stuff while you're not in the room.
No big whoop. Less sensitive than a quick-switched test, which has been shown time and time again to be far and away the most sensitive test, but if it's what you want to know, go for it.
x
You said "The very act of creating a true DBT situation automatically leads to extra difficulties etc...."Since this is true, and no one familiar with the subject claims otherwise, you need appropriate facilities and well trained listeners. If I understand you correctly you are not saying that DBTs are inherently flawed. Because if they were, you wouldn't have said in your AES paper that listening tests must be done blind, or would you?
Of course, amateurs don't have neither the means nor the listening skills to conduct DBTs properly, that's why such DBTs have to be conducted by professionals. And since professionally done DBTS are not inherently flawed, rants against DBT such as by R. Harley years ago are rather meaningless.
So if people claim that differences between cables exist or that the intelligent chip modifies the sound of CDs it is more than legitimate to ask whether these effects have been shown in properly conducted DBTs, reliably and in a repeatable manner.
Klaus
Klaus: ""
Because if they were, you wouldn't have said in your AES paper ""I believe it was a pre-print. Not an accepted paper.
There is a significant difference.
Cheers, John
but it sure did reflect his opinion on this issue, or did it not?Klaus
It does reflect his opinion.It does not, however, reflect the opinion of the AES. Merely that it was submitted, and deemed not acceptable for publication.
The reasons for non-acceptance will of course, be different between the author and those who rejected it. Not being one who rejected it, I cannot say why.
Cheers, John
Perhaps you could provide information on the distinction between a AES Preprint and an AES Paper. I ask because the information on the AES site seems to be unclear on the matter. For example the information in Information for Convention and Conference Authors (http://www.aes.org/journal/con_infoauth.html) speaks about "convention and conference papers" and the term Preprint doesn't even appear. This area does provide the following information regarding coprwright:"The standard AES paper cover is copyrighted by the Audio Engineering Society and may not be reproduced without permission. Copyright to the content (but not the AES format) of an AES paper remains with its author. However, when submitting a paper for presentation at an AES convention, an author agrees that the AES Journal will have the first opportunity to consider it for publication. If it is accepted for publication in the Journal, authors will be asked to execute a transfer of copyright agreement."
Again, mention of a "submitting a paper", not a preprint. As to what the AES publishes in its "Journal" we learn only that, for convention and conference papers, it has "the first opportunity to consider" for publication. There is certainly nothing about authors submitting papers for AES publication, nor for that matter anything at all about a submission/review/accept-reject process your post seems to hint at, or at least it seems to me that the following hints as such a process:
"It does not, however, reflect the opinion of the AES. Merely that it was submitted, and deemed not acceptable for publication.
The reasons for non-acceptance will of course, be different between the author and those who rejected it. Not being one who rejected it, I cannot say why."
To add to the confusion the Publication Contents list (at http://www.aes.org/publications/) included:
Convention Preprints .... a link that leads to a list of Preprint items
CD-ROMs of Convention Papers ... a link that leads a list of complete/single Convention Preprints
The 2nd item clearly fails to distinguish between a "Paper" and "Preprint".
Oh, BTW, since the Risch Paper/Preprint can be located by either of these routes, that the AES *publishes* said paper is *indisputable*; sorry for pointing out something all-too-obvious.
Anyway, as I cannot find information on the AES site on the process for authors submitting material for inclusion in a AES Journal I was hoping you could provide additional information on the topic.
Cheers, bjh
For conventions, only the abstract and a precis of a paper is reviewed, the actual papers do not arrive until later, and are published with the title "preprint". The abstract and precis are examined by several reviewers (two, usually, 3 if they disagree), at least when I am the papers chair. The paper itself is not reviewed at all, in fact we have (rarely, but it has happened) had people swap topics on us.Obviously we try to prevent this. It is, however, true, that convention preprints are not fully peer reviewed.
Now, if this is really a "preprint" it was accepted as a *convention* presentation based on the abstract and precis. I have no idea of what paper you are talking about, though, so I really can't say more.
But if he has a preprint from the AES, it was accepted into a convention.For AES conferences (smaller, more directed meetings) the rules will vary with the exact convention. Some review precis, some review papers, some only accept invited contributions.
Hey there..aha, a lurker..JR is the one who makes the distinction as to his paper being a "pre-print". He is the one who stated that his paper did not make it through some "culling" process.
I noted way back then, that anybody at all can submit a paper and call it a pre-print. As a pre-print, it can be entirely worthless, or it could be a gold mine.. It could have been rejected because it was obviously worthless, or as JR stated, because somebody didn't like him..(actually, I think he said politics). Another reason for rejection (that I can think of) could be something as simple as the topic fell outside some categories of interest. I do not know firsthand, the reason w/r to JR's submission.
Nonetheless, the descriptor "paper" carries with it the underlying assumption that the contents were somehow blessed by the AES, which is not correct. Yes, they own it, but no, they didn't consider, for whatever reason, it worthy of publication in a specific journal..
I cannot speak on AES Journal procedures w/r to acceptance or rejection, as I have never submitted to them. My experience is limited to other organizations, none of which have rejected any of my submissions or those of my collaborators. This could be construed as excellence on my part, or that they will publish anything at all as they are desperate!!..:-) Honestly, it may be something as simple as a lack of peers capable of understanding the content...(well ok, maybe staying awake while wading through the crap is the real reason) You could ask JJ about the process for AES.
I have, however, refereed papers for a technical journal, and have on occasion sent back submitted papers with severe technical errors (I checked that box that said:...""The author(s) should be advised to revise the paper according to the enclosed report.""
So I can speak on why a paper would be rejected on technical merit, but cannot speak on rejection for other reasons.
Cheers, John
.
When you have something to say which has merit, I will listen.Your post, however, had nothing. It was a simple knee jerk. Why do you bother?
Perhaps radio silence is a good thing to return to..
Cheers, John
a
nt
z
AES papers are presented by the author at the AES conventions. They are screened before being accepted, and the situation is such that there are generally about twice as many papers being submitted as there are slots to present them.
This was certainly true when I submitted my papers.Some folks like/want/need to make the distinction between these papers and published Journal papers, and call them pre-prints, because they have not been formally reviewed by the JAES board for formal publication. In point of fact, the AES prints on the front cover that it is a pre-print.
However, some folks have also been acting as if the AES papers which are presented at the conventions, often called pre-prints, are somehow completely free of any scrutiny, and that any old drek can blow in the door. This would be a misrepresentation of what actually occurs, and the fact that some selection process has already been in place. Many well regarded AES members have had their papers proceed no further than a pre-print, including if I recall corectly, jj.
Jon Risch
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
